Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the wife of a detenue whose property is forfeited under the SAFEMA is a "person aggrieved" entitled to prefer an appeal under section 12(4) of the Act.
Analysis: The expression "person aggrieved" must be construed in the context of the statute and the nature of the right affected. Under the SAFEMA, the scheme of sections 2, 4, 6, 7 and 12 shows that the appeal lies to a person whose own property is found to be illegally acquired and forfeited, or whose legal rights in such property are directly affected. A relative or associate who has no independent interest or right in the forfeited property cannot claim to be aggrieved merely because the property of the detenue has been forfeited. The wife's reliance on a general right of maintenance under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act did not help her, since no charge had been created in her favour over the forfeited properties and no legal grievance affecting a justiciable right was established.
Conclusion: The wife was not a "person aggrieved" within section 12(4) of the SAFEMA and had no locus to appeal against forfeiture of her husband's properties.
Final Conclusion: The statutory right of appeal under SAFEMA is confined to persons whose own legal rights in the forfeited property are adversely affected, and a spouse without an independent enforceable interest cannot invoke it merely on the basis of marital relationship or a claimed maintenance interest.
Ratio Decidendi: For the purposes of SAFEMA, "person aggrieved" means a person whose own legal or proprietary rights in the forfeited property are directly affected; a relative or spouse without an independent enforceable interest has no locus standi to appeal against forfeiture of the detenue's property.